This section allows you to view all Show Posts made by this member. Note that you can only see Show Posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I went - the third quarter was truly impressive.
I thought the architect of the third quarter was Jess Good - played a great term in the ruck and basically kept the ball locked into out half for the whole quarter.
Given the conditions, the contributions of both Good and Breean Harrington, were remarkable.
And, if only we had a male version of Erone Fitzpatrick....
As true as that is its more common in aflw that teams kick 2 goals for an entire game and thats on both sides. Says nothing about anyone really.
As true as that is its more common in aflw that teams kick 2 goals for an entire game and thats on both sides. Says nothing about anyone really.You are exagerating, but the difference with this is, Hawks finished 4th. They beat us who finished 5th. Its not a bottom 4 club.
In case people missed it.
Kangaroos dominated the Hawks last night.
Hawks were kept to 0.3 for the entire game.
Kangas managed 5.12.
Hand them the cup now?
The AFL have sort of exposed the folly of the small / short AFLW competition with a number of clubs playing each other in consecutive weeks, it's time for the AFL to get serious about managing the AFLW and not just leave the competition in free fall.
I'm not going to argue this one.
Folks will have their own opinion as to the legitimacy of the claim.
From my point of view I find it a bit bizarre comparing records over two completely different competitions.
Who has the most tennis singles grand slam wins?
Most people will tell you it's djokovic with 24.
However margaret court also had 24.
Did that not count because its a different competition?
You can do similar with golf etc
I didnt miss this claim. In fact there is no way to substantiate that and its precisely what someone defending this move would say irrespective of whether or not its fair.
Thing is, why is that the case? Why are they waiting longer? Is it because the data is skewed by hospitals in areas where there is more indigenous people being treated than not?
More questions than answers out of the claim. So by doing this in metro hospitals they treat the minority as priority to paper over not enough health care institutions in remote communities where the majority of indigenous patients presents skewing the data?
Is that the right outcome? Or more manipulation of the books to satisfy criteria?
Ultimately i dont know how anyone can defend a policy where an ethnic group is treated differently to others for right or wrong reasons. Sounds like they cant be bothered fixing the real reasons the issue exists and are papering over the cracks to me.
No way to substantiate it? Hospitals record whether patients are Indigenous and they record how long it takes for patients to be seen. That's part of their reporting against performance indicators and closing the gap measures. You can read all about the disparity in health care on the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare website. For example:
"Between July 2019 and June 2021, the proportion of hospitalisations for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (First Nations) people that had a procedure recorded was 12 percentage points lower than for non-Indigenous Australians, based on age-standardised percentages (66% compared with 78%)."
Then there's the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care:
"The Board of St Vincent’s Hospital in inner Sydney monitors a number of indicators of quality of care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, including rates of incomplete treatment in the Emergency Department (ED). Incomplete treatment includes patients who leave the ED before the medical team recommends discharge, those who are not present when called to be seen by a doctor and those who attended ED and did not wait to complete treatment - collectively known as leave events.
Incomplete treatment is associated with an increased risk of readmission and death.1 The NSW Ministry of Health has identified the high rate of incomplete treatment in EDs among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander patients compared to other patients (8.6% and 6.1%, respectively, nationally, 2019)2 as a priority issue.
The hospital Board requested that the ED department work to reduce the rate of incomplete treatment among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander patients."
Hospitals and agencies charged with monitoring health care outcomes don't make figures up. They report actual data.
You're right to some extent about data skewing "with First Nations males and females living in Major cities expected to live around 5 years longer than those living in Remote and very remote areas". However, St Vincents and other hospitals are working off their own patient data and remote hospitalisations and outcomes don't come into it .
And your assumption that the majority of Indigenous patients present for treatment in remote communities is incorrect. NSW has the highest Indigenous population with 339,500. Victoria is just ahead of the NT with 78,600 people to 76,700 and no communities in Victoria are considered to be remote.
Yes, it would be good to know why Indigenous patients at St Vincents and other hospitals have longer wait times and higher rates of incomplete treatment. More importantly, it's good that these issues have been identified and are being addressed.
st Vincent's is not solely in the NT.
So are we saying they dont want to wait like the rest of us are forced to?
Did you miss “First Nations patients were also waiting, on average, three times longer compared to non-Indigenous patients.”?
this is not affirmative action.
If i walk in to this ED and an indigenous bloke walkS in, both with category 4 classification, EXACT SAME ISSUE, he goes first because he's indigenous even though I was triaged before him. He gets upgraded to category 3.
Effectively they're fast tracked based on race. Seems fair....
Mate, they die younger, they live sicker lives.
Come up and visit me and you’ll see that 40-70% of the NT mob are wrapped in filthy bandages despite the medical professions best efforts.
We are not discussing intelligent well educated and articulate people like say Ernie Dingo here, we are discussing the downtrodden.
If you and he presented simultaneously you would both recieve the same treatment as (relatively) young fit healthy men, of this I have no doubt.
Certainly so here in the Territory.
Do you really believe this - If Trump did a similar thing would you call it good policy. Don't bother answering that.
And btw racism is racism regardless of which skin colour is the one being discriminated against
I won't bother answering your Taco question because we have another thread dedicated to the shenanigans of the senile, misogynistic, convicted felon who is making such a balls up of his second go at playing at being POTUS.
Yes, racism isn't confined to folk of a particular skin colour, it's much more than that.
"Racism is the process by which systems and policies, actions and attitudes create inequitable opportunities and outcomes for people based on race. Racism is more than just prejudice in thought or action. It occurs when this prejudice – whether individual or institutional – is accompanied by the power to discriminate against, oppress or limit the rights of others."
The key point there is that racism is prejudice by those with power over others, such as that exercised by the Chinese government against the Uyghurs and Tibetans. Ensuring that an ethnic minority has equal access to health care is affirmative action, not racism.
Another nothing burger "scoop". How shocking that a google search reveals this story shows up only in the Newscorpse press and other egregiously trashy tabloids.
The article gives a perfectly clear and reasonable explanation for the policy, but then you'd have to move beyond the rage bait headline and sensationalist wording and reporting of the article.